Syrif said:DracoKalen said:Syrif said:Djarn’s Amethyst Ring didn’t give haste lol (at least not during the Verant era with Brad when I played). And yet many players still didn’t have that stat ring. Rare/ultra-rare items and universal mounts I just wouldn’t put in the same category. Anyway Draco, my point about class interdependence has already been made. Respectfully agree to disagree. :)
Well I guess if that's what you want to tell yourself. But it has most definitely not been made. In fact with your precious comment about this or that being available you have proven yourself false. Plus other EQ players verified the items were more prevalent than you stated.
And as I said before interdependence does not hinge on 1 skill or another. It's how classes CLASSES interact with each other.
You made your point. Peace :)
Thanks
Tanix said:DracoKalen said:EppE said:Honestly I just don't see what mounts could add to the game other than convenience. I still don't see what positives it brings that could possibly outweigh any negatives.
Traveling is a part of the game. It factors into the death penatly. Everyone having a mount reduces that penalty without every interacting with another player. Yes items existed in EQ that gave run speed but they did not compare to actual SoW or getting a port, which required interaction with the community.
Ask yourself, does this feature add to the community or take away from it? Does it increase the amount of interactions I have to have with people or reduce them? If something is reducing the amount of interactions then I view it as a negative. Community only matters when you have to be a part of it.
Honestly, yes it is a convenience but it also cuts down the time my group is waiting for me. The positives definitely outway the negatives
Traveling is part of the game. Mounts just make traveing time a little less. This isn't an instant transport
This does add to the community. Horses are beautiful animals seeing them being ridden around and riding one is awesome. It doesn't change interactions, I'm walkiing with my group or riding, dynamic hasn't changed, just the mode of transport. Plus more interactions are encouraged as someone asking you, "Where did you get that sweet horse" is another conversation starter. Being part of the community has nothing to do with mounts, it's completely up to the player how social/unsocial they will be.
Your argument is exactly why modern mainstream games are the way they are. You are not concerned about game play, you are concerned about time, time to get to whatever thing you want to do. This is the foundation to which drives MMOs today. It is why travel is so fast (people don't have time to "waste" on travel, they need to get their fast to have their fun!), it is why there are dungeon finders (people don't have time to actually to build relationships, form groups through play, they need to get to the dungeons fast! So they can have fun!), it is why there are short dungeons (people don't have time to waste slogging through some long dungeon with tons of trash mobs, the point of play is the boss, why bother with a long draw out process, it is the boss that is fun!), it is why there is RMT (people don't have time to waste playing a game, they have a limited amount of time to play because they have a a life, and so the game shouldn't restrict them because they aren't some basement dwelling player who has all the time in the world to play!).
See, we don't want that game. Many of us here like game play, see it not as a waste, but the point. We see the time obstacles and various other things you would call "a waste of time" as extremely important to the over all aspect of play and that is why this game is being developed, not to cater to people who see games as a waste of time, but people who see that "game play" has been removed out of modern mainstream games because they were developed to cater to people who think it is a waste of time.
This is wrong on so many levels. Saving a few minutes of travel is not what is wrong with modern MMO's. The list of what is actually wrong is very long and starts with things like cash shops.
In the games I've had access to mounts I never missed any content, but while you're harping on that. In SOTA there are gate zones you have to pass through with lots of mobs contesting your passage, but most people use a speed buff to get throught it NOT a horse. So the issue you are so concerned about is already prevalent WITHOUT a mount. So lets ban all speed buffs!
It's like the mainstream players are trying to kill this game before it even comes out.
DracoKalen said:Tanix said:DracoKalen said:EppE said:Honestly I just don't see what mounts could add to the game other than convenience. I still don't see what positives it brings that could possibly outweigh any negatives.
Traveling is a part of the game. It factors into the death penatly. Everyone having a mount reduces that penalty without every interacting with another player. Yes items existed in EQ that gave run speed but they did not compare to actual SoW or getting a port, which required interaction with the community.
Ask yourself, does this feature add to the community or take away from it? Does it increase the amount of interactions I have to have with people or reduce them? If something is reducing the amount of interactions then I view it as a negative. Community only matters when you have to be a part of it.
Honestly, yes it is a convenience but it also cuts down the time my group is waiting for me. The positives definitely outway the negatives
Traveling is part of the game. Mounts just make traveing time a little less. This isn't an instant transport
This does add to the community. Horses are beautiful animals seeing them being ridden around and riding one is awesome. It doesn't change interactions, I'm walkiing with my group or riding, dynamic hasn't changed, just the mode of transport. Plus more interactions are encouraged as someone asking you, "Where did you get that sweet horse" is another conversation starter. Being part of the community has nothing to do with mounts, it's completely up to the player how social/unsocial they will be.
Your argument is exactly why modern mainstream games are the way they are. You are not concerned about game play, you are concerned about time, time to get to whatever thing you want to do. This is the foundation to which drives MMOs today. It is why travel is so fast (people don't have time to "waste" on travel, they need to get their fast to have their fun!), it is why there are dungeon finders (people don't have time to actually to build relationships, form groups through play, they need to get to the dungeons fast! So they can have fun!), it is why there are short dungeons (people don't have time to waste slogging through some long dungeon with tons of trash mobs, the point of play is the boss, why bother with a long draw out process, it is the boss that is fun!), it is why there is RMT (people don't have time to waste playing a game, they have a limited amount of time to play because they have a a life, and so the game shouldn't restrict them because they aren't some basement dwelling player who has all the time in the world to play!).
See, we don't want that game. Many of us here like game play, see it not as a waste, but the point. We see the time obstacles and various other things you would call "a waste of time" as extremely important to the over all aspect of play and that is why this game is being developed, not to cater to people who see games as a waste of time, but people who see that "game play" has been removed out of modern mainstream games because they were developed to cater to people who think it is a waste of time.
This is wrong on so many levels. Saving a few minutes of travel is not what is wrong with modern MMO's. The list of what is actually wrong is very long and starts with things like cash shops.
In the games I've had access to mounts I never missed any content, but while you're harping on that. In SOTA there are gate zones you have to pass through with lots of mobs contesting your passage, but most people use a speed buff to get throught it NOT a horse. So the issue you are so concerned about is already prevalent WITHOUT a mount. So lets ban all speed buffs!
Actually, cash shops are the resulf of the idealogy of "convenience" and that is the entire basis of your argument.
SOTA? What is that? How is using a game I don't even know, or may not even approve of as evidence of anything?
Caine said: It's like the mainstream players is trying to kill this game before it even comes out.
They do this with every game that comes out that isn't designed specifically for mainstream. They kill the game, then move on shortly after to go on about if the next game doesn't cater to mainstream, it will die out. Now look at what we have, 100's and 100's of MMOs all designed for mainstream that these people apparently don't want to play. Why is that?
Tanix said:
This is wrong on so many levels. Saving a few minutes of travel is not what is wrong with modern MMO's. The list of what is actually wrong is very long and starts with things like cash shops.
In the games I've had access to mounts I never missed any content, but while you're harping on that. In SOTA there are gate zones you have to pass through with lots of mobs contesting your passage, but most people use a speed buff to get throught it NOT a horse. So the issue you are so concerned about is already prevalent WITHOUT a mount. So lets ban all speed buffs!
Actually, cash shops are the resulf of the idealogy of "convenience" and that is the entire basis of your argument.
SOTA? What is that? How is using a game I don't even know, or may not even approve of as evidence of anything?
Well you keep using EQ and I never played that so theres that.
And I say cash shops is one thing from "a list" and you try to tell me that is the basis of my whole argument......talk about dodging an argument
Well what modern MMOs have you played then?
Caine said:It's like the mainstream players are trying to kill this game before it even comes out.
Just remember this is just a discussion between fans on our opinions. This is not a design forum. I am sure VR already has their plans for this subject. What one person wants to another will not change the game at all.
SoWplz said:Caine said:It's like the mainstream players are trying to kill this game before it even comes out.
Just remember this is just a discussion between fans on our opinions. This is not a design forum. I am sure VR already has their plans for this subject. What one person wants to another will not change the game at all.
Correct - but currently I don't have an MMORPG that I like to play, because of the mainstream influence, cash shops, instant gratification, Dungeon finders, lack of social interaction, instance zones and race and classes that don't really matter.
What VR wants to create is a virtual world. I need to post and say;
"Hey VR we believe in what you are doing" I have 10 friends who will play, if you stick to your Game Tenets. We have been waiting for years."
DracoKalen said:Well you keep using EQ and I never played that so theres that.
And I say cash shops is one thing from "a list" and you try to tell me that is the basis of my whole argument......talk about dodging an argument
Well what modern MMOs have you played then?
Considering Pantheon and its relation to EQ (ie it and Vanguard being the primary inspirtation driving this game), I would think it important for one to understand something about the game if they are going to argue in a forum over it, don't you think?
Using some game that has zero relation to this game and then claiming that because it allows something that strengthens your point here is a bit.. well far reaching don't you think?
You gave one example, I answered to it. You can give more examples, I even gave several above as well. Feel free to continue your point. Dodging would be making an accusation and then dismissing the discussion. /shrug
I have played... lets see.. I played many MMOs before they became too modern, but most became modernized since EQ.
Depends on what you call modern, as most of them nowadays are modern, even EQ as all have adopted modern mainstream design concepts.
I played Neverwinter, Merdian 59, UO, EQ, EQ 2, Vanguard, AC 1/2, Lineage 1/2, Guildwars 1, DAoC, Shadowbane, AO, Conan, WoW, Warhammer, Age of Wushu, SWG, KoTORO, Tabula Rasa, LoTRO, Star Trek Online, Rift, Champions Online, CoH, Secret World, DDO, alpha/beta tested but did not play in live (Black Desert, Aion, Matrix, ESO, Final Fantasy IX, Wildstar, Wizardry Online, Pirates of the Burning Sea, Eve Online, etc..) and a bunch of FTP I tried with friends trying to find something even remotely enjoyable, usually though we ended running our own private servers of various games and trying to configure the mainstream out of the game (which is near impossible due to the design and the fact that the client limits how much you can change in the game). I am sure I am missing a ton others, but that is the basis of what I have experienced. I stopped playing MMOs 3-4 years back because I stopped trying to make myself tolerate the garbage. I won't any longer.
Point is, none of them stayed non-mainstream that I played to any extent that were not turned into mainstream. Now some of the had bits and peices of mainstream in them from the start, but the whole RMT (aka convenience) "games for everyone" design focus eventually kiled them all and now they are all gimmicks/ Over the years until I stopped playing completely, I would pick a game, tolerate it, compromising and then the game would shift over the years catering again to mainstream design. EQ did this early on begining most noticably with SoL and PoP expansions. EQ 2 while had many mainstream concepts originally designed into it (ie encounter locking, level locked content, etc...), DDO scrapped its entire complex design system to implement a dumbed down "WoW like tree format", WoW while the basis for mainstream even was able to top itself in that by dumbing the game down to that akin to a mobile app.
Most of them sold out, RMT stores of various types, fast travel everywhere, dungeons streamlined to 15-20 min runs (lotro had extremely long keyed dungeons that took hours to complete and they redesigned them all to 15-20 min runs).
I have no desire to play any of them anymore as they are not even shadows of what they once were. I am pretty clear when I say if you get what you want, I won't play this game. I compromised for years and all it got me was yet another failure.
My question to you is, with ALL of those choices out there who obviously provide numerous features you seek, why do you see this one as important and why make this one just like them? There are still games out there without RMT, but all the fancy modern designs? Why not them? I am honestly interested, I mean, if I had your requirements, I would be playing them in an instant. /shrug
What I think Pantheon will do setup the "Preception System" in such a way, that fast travel is a disadavatage to horizontal leveling and character developement. Exploring the virtual world is the whole point.
If I find a strange carving on a tree, but don't get a preception ping, you can bet I am going to comeback to that tree every 5 levels or so to see if I can solve the mystery.
Yeah ok VR will introduce mounts, but the whole idea is to get the player off the safe path. There will be climbing and areas underwater. New things to discover that I was not able to detect before. Hopefully gameplay will dictate that mounting your horse and by-passing the zone because you fought there 10 levels ago, is a poor decision.
Too much fast travel should lead to poor character development and will result in a weaker character at higher levels.
The last thing I want are zones broken down by level. I should be discovering new secrets in the same zone I started in at level 1 as well as level 50. By doing so you can nullify the idea of by-passing content with fast travel.
Tanix said:
DracoKalen said:Well you keep using EQ and I never played that so theres that.
And I say cash shops is one thing from "a list" and you try to tell me that is the basis of my whole argument......talk about dodging an argument
Well what modern MMOs have you played then?
Considering Pantheon and its relation to EQ (ie it and Vanguard being the primary inspirtation driving this game), I would think it important for one to understand something about the game if they are going to argue in a forum over it, don't you think?
Using some game that has zero relation to this game and then claiming that because it allows something that strengthens your point here is a bit.. well far reaching don't you think?
You gave one example, I answered to it. You can give more examples, I even gave several above as well. Feel free to continue your point. Dodging would be making an accusation and then dismissing the discussion. /shrug
I have played... lets see.. I played many MMOs before they became too modern, but most became modernized since EQ.
Depends on what you call modern, as most of them nowadays are modern, even EQ as all have adopted modern mainstream design concepts.
I played Neverwinter, Merdian 59, UO, EQ, EQ 2, Vanguard, AC 1/2, Lineage 1/2, Guildwars 1, DAoC, Shadowbane, AO, Conan, WoW, Warhammer, Age of Wushu, SWG, KoTORO, Tabula Rasa, LoTRO, Star Trek Online, Rift, Champions Online, CoH, Secret World, DDO, alpha/beta tested but did not play in live (Black Desert, Aion, Matrix, ESO, Final Fantasy IX, Wildstar, Wizardry Online, Pirates of the Burning Sea, Eve Online, etc..) and a bunch of FTP I tried with friends trying to find something even remotely enjoyable, usually though we ended running our own private servers of various games and trying to configure the mainstream out of the game (which is near impossible due to the design and the fact that the client limits how much you can change in the game). I am sure I am missing a ton others, but that is the basis of what I have experienced. I stopped playing MMOs 3-4 years back because I stopped trying to make myself tolerate the garbage. I won't any longer.
Point is, none of them stayed non-mainstream that I played to any extent that were not turned into mainstream. Now some of the had bits and peices of mainstream in them from the start, but the whole RMT (aka convenience) "games for everyone" design focus eventually kiled them all and now they are all gimmicks/ Over the years until I stopped playing completely, I would pick a game, tolerate it, compromising and then the game would shift over the years catering again to mainstream design. EQ did this early on begining most noticably with SoL and PoP expansions. EQ 2 while had many mainstream concepts originally designed into it (ie encounter locking, level locked content, etc...), DDO scrapped its entire complex design system to implement a dumbed down "WoW like tree format", WoW while the basis for mainstream even was able to top itself in that by dumbing the game down to that akin to a mobile app.
Most of them sold out, RMT stores of various types, fast travel everywhere, dungeons streamlined to 15-20 min runs (lotro had extremely long keyed dungeons that took hours to complete and they redesigned them all to 15-20 min runs).
I have no desire to play any of them anymore as they are not even shadows of what they once were. I am pretty clear when I say if you get what you want, I won't play this game. I compromised for years and all it got me was yet another failure.
My question to you is, with ALL of those choices out there who obviously provide numerous features you seek, why do you see this one as important and why make this one just like them? There are still games out there without RMT, but all the fancy modern designs? Why not them? I am honestly interested, I mean, if I had your requirements, I would be playing them in an instant. /shrug
Well if you want a non-modern try Istaria, it's free to play for most of the biped races. Of course I haven't played in many years but last time I checked it was still a throwback game.
And to answer your other question SOTA is Shroud of the Avatar. It was built as an updated version of UO. But I don't think it's free to play and I never played UO to tell you how true it stays. But it doesn't have mounts...at least not to ride. You do have to run everywhere so it's right up your alley. They also went back to you having to find your quests, no explanation points or question marks over the NPC's head.
Never played a game where you didn't get what you wanted without a lot of work. And please don't go on about modern and easy. The first game I played they messed up the armor values for my race and it was the equivalent of you playing EQ and the first 80 levels you had no armor, no rings,no bracers no leather no chain no plate. Just the equivalent of being naked with a loincloth. Armed with 2 short swords a basic heal and a low level magic bolt type of spell. And I solo'd some and grouped when my guildees were available. I died a lot to. But easy it was not!
Caine said:What I think Pantheon will do setup the "Preception System" in such a way, that fast travel is a disadavatage to horizontal leveling and character developement. Exploring the virtual world is the whole point.
If I find a strange carving on a tree, but don't get a preception ping, you can bet I am going to comeback to that tree every 5 levels or so to see if I can solve the mystery.
Yeah ok VR will introduce mounts, but the whole idea is to get the player off the safe path. There will be climbing and areas underwater. New things to discover that I was not able to detect before. Hopefully gameplay will dictate that mounting your horse and by-passing the zone because you fought there 10 levels ago, is a poor decision.
Too much fast travel should lead to poor character delelopment and will result in a weaker character at higher levels.
The last thing I want are zones broken down by level. I should be discovering new secrets in the same zone I started in at level 1 as well as level 50. By doing so you can nullify the idea of by-passing content with fast travel.
Well said :)
Mounts won't break the game if done correctly. If they replace class fast travel abilities then it will be negative overall. This type of situation will lead to other types of items being used to take uniqueness out of other classes. But we will see what they do. It's easy to add stuff to a game and much harder to remove them from the game due to the cultural type of impact it will have when being removed in the game. Game mechanics in general will breed a mindset of players and when you take, or change, something away that it will always negatively impact the players. So they have to be careful on what they do and what type of players they want. Do they want the old school dedicated players? or casual type of players? or something in the middle? The start of the game will be the determining factor on what type of players they will attract and if they miss the mark on their target market then they will fail in the first year or two.
But I can't know for sure until I get my hands on the game and test it.
EppE said:Honestly I just don't see what mounts could add to the game other than convenience. I still don't see what positives it brings that could possibly outweigh any negatives.
Traveling is a part of the game. It factors into the death penatly. Everyone having a mount reduces that penalty without every interacting with another player. Yes items existed in EQ that gave run speed but they did not compare to actual SoW or getting a port, which required interaction with the community.
Ask yourself, does this feature add to the community or take away from it? Does it increase the amount of interactions I have to have with people or reduce them? If something is reducing the amount of interactions then I view it as a negative. Community only matters when you have to be a part of it.
If being reductionist, what do movespeed buffs add to the game other than convenience and a marginal amount of player to player interaction?
Mounts can add all kinds of things to the game depending on how they are implemented and they don't have to invalidate player movespeed buff interactions if the buffs stack with mounts. They could be a recurring gold/plat sink, a means of prestige, an entire means of alternate progression where getting a mount is expensive and challenging but also just the beginning/baseline where afterward the player would need to find a multitude of equipment sets throughout the world to allow use of their mount in different climates/regions. There could be stats for mounts requiring players to make trade-offs or otherwise customize the beast for their own needs: does the player make the mount a packmule sacrificing bonus movespeed for additional storage space on the mount or remove all storage for max speed. There could even be leveling of a mount or just player mount related skills.
Also they don't need to make mounts something that can be summoned at a whim almost anywhere in the world like other MMOs.
DracoKalen said:Well if you want a non-modern try Istaria, it's free to play for most of the biped races. Of course I haven't played in many years but last time I checked it was still a throwback game.
And to answer your other question SOTA is Shroud of the Avatar. It was built as an updated version of UO. But I don't think it's free to play and I never played UO to tell you how true it stays. But it doesn't have mounts...at least not to ride. You do have to run everywhere so it's right up your alley. They also went back to you having to find your quests, no explanation points or question marks over the NPC's head.
Never played a game where you didn't get what you wanted without a lot of work. And please don't go on about modern and easy. The first game I played they messed up the armor values for my race and it was the equivalent of you playing EQ and the first 80 levels you had no armor, no rings,no bracers no leather no chain no plate. Just the equivalent of being naked with a loincloth. Armed with 2 short swords a basic heal and a low level magic bolt type of spell. And I solo'd some and grouped when my guildees were available. I died a lot to. But easy it was not!
I looked at it, but it looks like just an old game with still the problem of modern game play features (ie conveniences).
Ah, ok I wasn't sure what you meant by SOTA. I followed the game from the start, it is nothing like UO and to be honest, it is a cash grab gimmick to which Garriot has taken a lot of flak for.
I think that you and I have different understanding of what game play is. Like I said, this isn't my first iteration with games, I watched played them and watched them develop for over 20 years. I know what I want, and the market does not have it, but Pantheon "may" have it. Time will tell, but it certainly will not have it by catering to "conveniences".
Iksar said:EppE said:Honestly I just don't see what mounts could add to the game other than convenience. I still don't see what positives it brings that could possibly outweigh any negatives.
Traveling is a part of the game. It factors into the death penatly. Everyone having a mount reduces that penalty without every interacting with another player. Yes items existed in EQ that gave run speed but they did not compare to actual SoW or getting a port, which required interaction with the community.
Ask yourself, does this feature add to the community or take away from it? Does it increase the amount of interactions I have to have with people or reduce them? If something is reducing the amount of interactions then I view it as a negative. Community only matters when you have to be a part of it.
If being reductionist, what do movespeed buffs add to the game other than convenience and a marginal amount of player to player interaction?
Well, if Mounts were summoned by a mage for a player to ride for a limited time (buff), you might have a point. Mounts however are generic "everyone gets a perm-buff item" solution and as we have pointed out, once everyone has it, then it is the default.
Tanix said:DracoKalen said:Well if you want a non-modern try Istaria, it's free to play for most of the biped races. Of course I haven't played in many years but last time I checked it was still a throwback game.
And to answer your other question SOTA is Shroud of the Avatar. It was built as an updated version of UO. But I don't think it's free to play and I never played UO to tell you how true it stays. But it doesn't have mounts...at least not to ride. You do have to run everywhere so it's right up your alley. They also went back to you having to find your quests, no explanation points or question marks over the NPC's head.
Never played a game where you didn't get what you wanted without a lot of work. And please don't go on about modern and easy. The first game I played they messed up the armor values for my race and it was the equivalent of you playing EQ and the first 80 levels you had no armor, no rings,no bracers no leather no chain no plate. Just the equivalent of being naked with a loincloth. Armed with 2 short swords a basic heal and a low level magic bolt type of spell. And I solo'd some and grouped when my guildees were available. I died a lot to. But easy it was not!
I looked at it, but it looks like just an old game with still the problem of modern game play features (ie conveniences).
Ah, ok I wasn't sure what you meant by SOTA. I followed the game from the start, it is nothing like UO and to be honest, it is a cash grab gimmick to which Garriot has taken a lot of flak for.
I think that you and I have different understanding of what game play is. Like I said, this isn't my first iteration with games, I watched played them and watched them develop for over 20 years. I know what I want, and the market does not have it, but Pantheon "may" have it. Time will tell, but it certainly will not have it by catering to "conveniences".
I looked at it, but it looks like just an old game with still the problem of modern game play features (ie conveniences).
You're great at the genralizations but what "conveniences" offended you?
Ah, ok I wasn't sure what you meant by SOTA. I followed the game from the start, it is nothing like UO and to be honest, it is a cash grab gimmick to which Garriot has taken a lot of flak for.
Have to agree with you there to a point
I think that you and I have different understanding of what game play is. Like I said, this isn't my first iteration with games, I watched played them and watched them develop for over 20 years. I know what I want, and the market does not have it, but Pantheon "may" have it. Time will tell, but it certainly will not have it by catering to "conveniences".
We probably do, I started gaming about 35 years ago. Everything from D&D to AD&D to Gurps and Vampire the masquerade, and battletech. My first online was a PVP MUDD called mortal realms. Then Istaria upon release followed shortly by EQ2. Beta tested and played both for years, EQ2 got old and istaria never really advanced and after maxing out my character as a crafter and adventurere and finishing my lair I lost interest. Now a days I haven't been able to find anythng really interesting. Thought SOTA would be it but it was SOSDD. When I get bored I drop in on Mechwarrior online join a PUG and blow stuff up.
After looking at several MMORPGs and how they handled mounts I think it would be wise to keep mounts moving at close to regular player speed. Nobody is gonna ask for a speed buff from other players if they can just summon their 100%-300% move speed mount. Don't go the clown car route of introducing 5000 different mounts, the good looking mounts should be prestige items and they should fit in with the lore of the game world. If mounts are to give significant benefits in terms of speed boost and carry capacity etc then there should be significant costs for upkeeping one not merely a one time purchase cost.
Well I've seen a lot of smoke blown so I'm going to clear the air some.
A few pages back Tanix stated that this was a difference between "mainstream vs traditional game play".
My response to that is yes and no. First off "game play" goes back a lot further then EQ, in fact mounts, speficically horsese have been traditional back into the late '70s ( that's 1970). They came late to online gaming as the coding was problematic in the early years. Not because they didn't belong!
Second to properly state this argument it is not "mainstream vs traditional game play" but your opinion versus other peoples opinion. No one here is right or wrong, just simply stating how you feel about the subject. Including me!
Now I've seen a lot of buzz words thrown around and used to prove mounts bad, foot traffic good. But let's look at this from some of the points I can remember.
Horses let you skip content: Really. Because I use to skip content without a horse, a little luck and enagaing my brain....AND NO SPEED BUFF
But then who cares? If someone wants to jump ahead to more challenging content who am I to judge...that's not mainstream or traditional....just minding my own business. If they're doing something wrong or using an exploit then that needs to be dealt with. So a bug/exploit ticket would be appropriate.
Interferes with community: What? Do you have any idea how many additional community events could be generated centered around horses. Also what's the connection? I'm going to spend more time with my horse then with the community? Silly.
If someone could explain this being a little more specific I would like to hear it.
Horses are used to get from point A to point B, not instantly. Yes they make the trip shorter but unless the Devs get carried away not that much shorter. If there's an encounter on the road most games have a forced dismount when the rider is attacked (melee/ranged/spell) which also by the way includes another group memeber, so any fleeing of content would be done on foot.
As to a player character not using a speed buff on other PCs because everyone is riding. OK, you got me there. So you don't have to keep clicking on peoples names and hitting your speed buff while traveling down the road not in combat. You got me there, but then every where else you can't use a horse you can spam away.